ERP correlates of valence asymmetry during incentive anticipation

Neural dissociation between reward and salience prediction errors through the lens of optimistic bias

The question of how the brain represents reward prediction errors is central to reinforcement learning and adaptive, goal-directed behavior. Previous studies have revealed prediction error representations in multiple electrophysiological signatures, but it remains elusive whether these electrophysiological correlates underlying prediction errors are sensitive to valence (in a signed form) or to salience (in an unsigned form). One possible reason concerns the loose correspondence between objective probability and subjective prediction resulting from the optimistic bias, that is, the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of encountering positive future events. In the present electroencephalography (EEG) study, we approached this question by directly measuring participants' idiosyncratic, trial-to-trial prediction errors elicited by subjective and objective probabilities across two experiments. We adopted monetary gain and loss feedback in Experiment 1 and positive and negative feedback as communicated by the same zero-value feedback in Experiment 2. We provided electrophysiological evidence in time and time-frequency domains supporting both reward and salience prediction error signals. Moreover, we showed that these electrophysiological signatures were highly flexible and sensitive to an optimistic bias and various forms of salience. Our findings shed new light on multiple presentations of prediction error in the human brain, which differ in format and functional role.

Intolerance of uncertainty and neural measures of anticipation and reactivity for affective stimuli

Intolerance of uncertainty (IU) is a transdiagnostic construct referring to the aversive interpretation of contexts characterized by uncertainty. Indeed, there is a growing body of research examining individual differences in IU and how these are associated with emotional anticipation and reactivity during periods of certainty and uncertainty, however, how these associations are reflected via neurophysiological indices remain understudied and poorly understood. The present study examined the relationship between self-reported IU and neurophysiological measures of emotional anticipation and reactivity, namely stimulus preceding negativity (SPN) and late positive potential (LPP), and self-report measures of emotional experiences. These measures were captured during an S1-S2 picture viewing tasks in which participants were presented with cues (S1) that either indicated the affective valence of upcoming picture (S2) or provided no information about the valence. Findings here provide evidence for significant associations between SPN amplitude and IU scores during uncertain and certain-positive cueing conditions, and significant associations between LPP amplitude and IU scores during both certain- and uncertain-negative picture viewing conditions that appear driven by prospective IU sub-scores. These positive associations between IU and SPN amplitude are suggestive of heightened emotional anticipation following S1 cues, while positive associations between IU and LPP are suggestive of heightened emotional reactivity following S2 images. These findings are discussed in detail relative to existing IU literature, and potential implications of these findings.

Voice, rhythm, and beep stimuli differently affect the right hemisphere preponderance and components of stimulus-preceding negativity

The present study investigated whether auditory stimuli with different contents affect right laterality and the components of stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN). A time-estimation task was performed under voice, rhythm, beep, and control conditions. The SPN interval during which participants anticipated the stimulus was divided into quarters to define early and late SPNs. Early and late components of SPN were also extracted using a principal component analysis. The anticipation of voice sounds enhanced the early SPN and the early component, which reflected the anticipation of language processing. Beep sounds elicited the right hemisphere preponderance of the early component, the early SPN, and the late SPN. The rhythmic sound tended to attenuate the amplitude compared with the two other stimuli. These findings further substantiate the existence of separate early and late components of the SPN. In addition, they suggest that the early component reflects selective anticipatory attention toward differing types of auditory feedback.

Comparing the motivational value of rewards and losses in an EEG-pupillometry study

We found earlier that performance-contingent rewards lead to faster performance than equivalent losses [Carsten, Hoofs, Boehler, & Krebs, 2019. Motivation Science, 5(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mot0000117]. Here, we further tested the hypothesis that motivation to gain rewards is higher than to avoid losses, even when incentive values are matched. As implicit markers of motivation, we assessed electroencephalography (EEG) focusing on the P3 after target and feedback onset, and the Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN), as well as simultaneously recorded pupil size. Comparing only reward and loss prospect trials in Experiment 1, we found no consistent differences in behavior and electrophysiological markers of motivation, although pupil data suggested higher arousal after feedback in potential-loss trials. Including additional no-incentive trials in Experiment 2, we found consistent evidence that motivation to gain rewards was higher than to avoid losses: In line with behavior, the target-P3 was most pronounced for reward-related stimuli, followed by loss and no-incentive ones. This same ranking was found in the P3 and the FRN after positive outcomes (i.e., reward, avoided loss, and correct feedback in no-incentive trials). Negative outcomes featured a different pattern in line with the pupil response, which suggests that losses are emotionally salient events, without invigorating behavior proportionally. In sum, these findings suggest that the motivation to gain rewards is more pronounced than motivation to avoid equivalent losses, at least in tasks promoting transient increases in attention triggered by incentive prospect. These motivational differences may arise as avoided losses are not profitable in the long term, in contrast to gained rewards.